ST XI question that may involve spoilers
- Thread starter VOODOOXI
- Start date
G
Garrovick
Guest
No one can say for sure.
Paramount is being tight lipped.
No one has stolen the script yet.
Paramount is being tight lipped.
No one has stolen the script yet.
Maybe the whole film backstory is revealed by Old Spock in a mindmeld with Nero?
Or multiple timelines. Which meshes with the now old (so I don't think I"m spoiling anything here) AICN rumor of Spock needing to correct the timeline after Kirk's birth was prevented by time-traveling Romulans.
TNG's "Yesterday's Enterprise" was also apparently one of the influences on Orci. So, I'm going with multiple timelines.
Meh. I'll be in the theatre on they day it opens either way. This extreme secrecy stuff is rather annoying to me, though. As I've posted here before, I don't get the 'need' for it. Bestselling novels are quite frequently turned into blockbuster movies; obviously, those who have read the books know the movies' endings. Common knowledge of the plots apparently doesn't prevent people from going to see movies. I would prefer it if JJA and Co. released more (the cast-in-uniform photos, general plot lines, etc.), but not everything (script, minutae, details, etc.
We'll get that, but the change in release date means they can't give us much right now, because they need something to get people excited next year. We've still got a year and four days until the film opens.
Yeah if it weren't for the date change, we'd probably have some more scraps thrown our way by now. If I recall, they were just getting ready to gear up more promotional stuff when the date was moved back. Really, at this point we should be grateful we have a neat teaser trailer as I'm sure that would have been bumped back too if they hadn't have released it before changing the date.
POSSIBLE SPOILERS?? BELOW
My theory (I forget if I made it up or read it somewhere) is that old Spock will try to restore the original timeline (that he remembers) but will ultimately fail.
Young Spock will find a compromise and create a new "almost the same" timeline - which will free Abrams and Co. from continuity problems while at the same time maintaining the integrity of the original timeline.
My theory (I forget if I made it up or read it somewhere) is that old Spock will try to restore the original timeline (that he remembers) but will ultimately fail.
Young Spock will find a compromise and create a new "almost the same" timeline - which will free Abrams and Co. from continuity problems while at the same time maintaining the integrity of the original timeline.
I've heard that, it's the AICN rumor, I think.
I really hope that's not the case. I think that's a convenient cheat, really.
Think of Roddenberry as having chronicled only part of the history of Kirk's Enteprise and its five year mission. Now we get the rest (or at least an earlier part). There's no reason for those timelines to clash.
The alternate timeline/universe is what could save the franchise. Instead of re-hashing what has already been done for the hundredth time, JJ & Co. will be free to surprise us and bring a fresh perspective to a worn (read dull) franchise.
The thing is, having this "alternate timeline" won't make a damned bit of difference, good or bad.. except for potentially flushing "history" of specific characters and flushing specific stories.The alternate timeline/universe is what could save the franchise. Instead of re-hashing what has already been done for the hundredth time, JJ & Co. will be free to surprise us and bring a fresh perspective to a worn (read dull) franchise.
If you aren't dealing with new characters who are called the same as the old characters (whether that's Kirk or Picard or Janeway or Sisko or Archer or Captain Bob for cryin' out loud!), I honestly can't see ANY advantage to doing this. The only advantage of this is that you can tell new stories about new people and still CLAIM that it's the same people... well, sorta-kinda....
This is why I don't want this to happen, and why I have to keep pointing out that other than a few TrekBBS posters claiming with "absolute truth (tm)" that it's going to happen, NOBODY has indicated that there will be additional stories with this new cast. I haven't seen it, and neither have any of you, have you? Abrams hasnt' said it, Orci hasn't said it, nobody from PCC has said it... the best you have is boilerplate language in contracts which some folks CLAIM to have seen (and I find that difficult to accept, either, since corporate legal departments are normally quite tight-lipped about that sort of thing) indicating "options" for future movies if any are made.
As far as the current production is concerned, it's a "one-off" movie. Whether or not PPC decides, later, to move ahead with sequels is completely and totally unknown. It is very likely, however, that any such sequels would be done without the involvement of Abrams (making Orci the Exec Producer, maybe?) Whether or not PPC or CBS-TV decide to make additional stories with other casts is also indeterminate at this time. All we've got is one movie, with a specific storyline that Abrams originally came up with back in the mid-80s (right after TWOK came out), which has been fleshed out and expanded into a filming script by two guys, one of whom is a self-proclaimed "TOS geek."
The alternate timeline/universe is what could save the franchise. Instead of re-hashing what has already been done for the hundredth time, JJ & Co. will be free to surprise us and bring a fresh perspective to a worn (read dull) franchise.
I see your point, but nothing TOS has been done for the hundreth time. I keep saying that we know remarkably little about these characters. Bits and pieces. Throwaway lines of exposition in episodes. Those who are big into fanon think they know more, but fanon has never been gospel -- sorry, canon.
We honestly have no idea how Kirk really became captain of the Enterprise. Or why Spock became his first officer and didn't accompany Pike, to whom he was obviously so loyal. We have no idea what kind of events led them to becoming a crew. This isn't yet a second or third version of an origins story like Superman or Batman. It's the first.
And, there's no reason their stories can't be told, and maybe even few adventures beyond that, without treading on their adventures farther into the future.
If the franchise is worn out, creating a new timeline isn't going to help. By the "it's all been done" and "worn out" logic, the first thing in that new timeline will simply be the 101st thing overall.
They'll still be fans that note some TNG or VOY or DS9 episode where they did basically the same things or faced a similar problem. Unless of course, creating a new timeline wipes out all our memories of the old one.
Is it really realistic to believe Paramount would okay a relaunch/re-imagining of TREK without even the consideration of follow-up films?
Is it likely screenwriters hired to write a new TREK film would not have in mind or plan the future of the franchise?
Is it likely Paramount would, if the film is successful, change said creative team for future projects?
If you were to make a new TREK film, would you make it with the idea that it be the only one or would you plan ahead for others?
Is it likely screenwriters hired to write a new TREK film would not have in mind or plan the future of the franchise?
Is it likely Paramount would, if the film is successful, change said creative team for future projects?
If you were to make a new TREK film, would you make it with the idea that it be the only one or would you plan ahead for others?
I agree. Logic and economics would dictate that if this movie is a big success, there will be a second movie.
That said, I doubt they approached TMP in 1979 as the first in a series of Trek movies. And I doubt Abrams is doing that now. First things first. Of course, in this day and age, the pressure to produce a second movie when the first is a success is strong. So, the prospect of a second one may be hovering quietly in the backs of their minds as they make this movie. At least moreso than back when TMP was being made.
Franklin, thanks for your response. I definitely agree with you in regards to TMP's sequel prospects back in the day. But, like you say, the sequel pressure is high today esp. on known (pre-sold) properties.
This goes toward my surprise at the fairly quick exit from the so-called "interregnum". I really expected (desired?) TREK to lay dormant for at least a decade before someone brought it back. But, given today's economic climate, perhaps it was naïve of me to think that Para would let a brand like TREK lay dormant any longer than they have to.
IMO, even at this early stage (whether explicitly stated or not by TPTB), to assume there would be no sequels to this film would be foolish.
This goes toward my surprise at the fairly quick exit from the so-called "interregnum". I really expected (desired?) TREK to lay dormant for at least a decade before someone brought it back. But, given today's economic climate, perhaps it was naïve of me to think that Para would let a brand like TREK lay dormant any longer than they have to.
IMO, even at this early stage (whether explicitly stated or not by TPTB), to assume there would be no sequels to this film would be foolish.
Similar threads
